5 ms·

> The argument against this is that if you reimburse private school tuition, you divert money from public schools, thus exacerbating the problem. Well, if I do

> The argument against this is that if you reimburse private school tuition, you divert money from public schools, thus exacerbating the problem. Well, if I do poorly at my job, I won't get paid either. Why does a school system get protection that the people paying for it do not? The status quo continues to hurt children. > And once you divert public money to private schools, are they obligated to meet the same academic standards? Well, yes, they should be held to the same standards as our public schools. Heck, if they take tax payer money they should have the same standard of what can be added as extra fees (no BS taking the money and demanding additional tuition). It bugs me that when private social programs are brought in to deal with the worst-of-the-worst[1] and get results that we don't allow our children the same outlet education-wise. FYI: North Dakota has a variation of open enrollment for public schools https://www.nd.gov/dpi/SchoolStaff/SchoolFinance/OpenEnrollment/ https://www.nd.gov/dpi/SchoolStaff/SchoolFinance/OpenEnrollm... 1) I remember the lecture by one group out of Chicago in the 90's (cannot remember the name but they had some good data collection that I took hints from). They had a client burn down their HQ. They still continued even with that individual.

stinkytaco 10y ago
> Well, if I do poorly at my job, I won't get paid either. The problem here is always measurement. How do you measure education success? Tests? If we have too many tests, people complain that their kids get too much testing. Grades? That leads to inflation. And so on. I don't think most people will disagree with the need for measurement and performance expectations, it's the details that are the sticking point. > Well, yes, they should be held to the same standards as our public schools. Heck, if they take tax payer money they should have the same standard of what can be added as extra fees (no BS taking the money and demanding additional tuition). But what's the point of the school being private then? They become public school that we don't have elected oversight of. >FYI: North Dakota has a variation of open enrollment for public schools I actually live in North Dakota and know a few families who utilize open enrollment. I have my issues with it because the district foots the costs for transportation, but the key difference is that it is between public schools, not between private and public.
- protomyth 10y ago
  > The problem here is always measurement. The measurement is always going to be a problem, but we already measure public schools with tests. It really isn't the main issue as parents will pick the schools and they by and large know if their children are being educated. > But what's the point of the school being private then? They become public school that we don't have elected oversight of. I'm a bit confused. Just because I think that the tuition needs to be the same for everyone as a parent protection mechanism doesn't mean their won't be a difference. > I have my issues with it because the district foots the costs for transportation, but the key difference is that it is between public schools, not between private and public. One step towards allowing parents to vote on if the school is doing a good job. I do wish they would transfer the tuition to private schools also. If a district accepts the students then transportation is an issue which the state could separate out in a budget. Sadly, ND is going to have some problems this year because of an unexpected expense.
  - stinkytaco 10y ago
    > I'm a bit confused. Just because I think that the tuition needs to be the same for everyone as a parent protection mechanism doesn't mean their won't be a difference. What would be the meaningful differences? We are saying, "here's a fixed amount you can spend, you can't charge more and here are the standards you have to meet. Oh, and you can't go out of business, since that would be disruptive to the child's education." It really seems like we've removed most of the advantages of a private school, but can't elect their oversight like we can with a public school. I see absolutely no benefit to having a bunch of disparate schools that have identical budgets and standards. We could do that with magnet schools. EDIT: I should also add, that I think people overestimate how much vouchers can do to solve the problem, which is largely socioeconomic. Rich people would still live close to the best schools and even if poor people could send their kids there, they still deal with so many disadvantages. If all the best schools are an hour bus ride away, that's unfair to people who don't live in that neighborhood. If I still cannot afford extra curriculars or class trips, then I still cannot give my kids the same education. There's so many other things that figure into the education formula that are not just the school you attend or the teacher that teaches you. I think the best option is to increase people's engagement in their school systems (via school board elections, lobbying, PTA and so on) and get incentives to improve public schools.

stinkytaco 10y ago

> Well, if I do poorly at my job, I won't get paid either. The problem here is always measurement. How do you measure education success? Tests? If we have too many tests, people complain that their kids get too much testing. Grades? That leads to inflation. And so on. I don't think most people will disagree with the need for measurement and performance expectations, it's the details that are the sticking point. > Well, yes, they should be held to the same standards as our public schools. Heck, if they take tax payer money they should have the same standard of what can be added as extra fees (no BS taking the money and demanding additional tuition). But what's the point of the school being private then? They become public school that we don't have elected oversight of. >FYI: North Dakota has a variation of open enrollment for public schools I actually live in North Dakota and know a few families who utilize open enrollment. I have my issues with it because the district foots the costs for transportation, but the key difference is that it is between public schools, not between private and public.

protomyth 10y ago
> The problem here is always measurement. The measurement is always going to be a problem, but we already measure public schools with tests. It really isn't the main issue as parents will pick the schools and they by and large know if their children are being educated. > But what's the point of the school being private then? They become public school that we don't have elected oversight of. I'm a bit confused. Just because I think that the tuition needs to be the same for everyone as a parent protection mechanism doesn't mean their won't be a difference. > I have my issues with it because the district foots the costs for transportation, but the key difference is that it is between public schools, not between private and public. One step towards allowing parents to vote on if the school is doing a good job. I do wish they would transfer the tuition to private schools also. If a district accepts the students then transportation is an issue which the state could separate out in a budget. Sadly, ND is going to have some problems this year because of an unexpected expense.
- stinkytaco 10y ago
  > I'm a bit confused. Just because I think that the tuition needs to be the same for everyone as a parent protection mechanism doesn't mean their won't be a difference. What would be the meaningful differences? We are saying, "here's a fixed amount you can spend, you can't charge more and here are the standards you have to meet. Oh, and you can't go out of business, since that would be disruptive to the child's education." It really seems like we've removed most of the advantages of a private school, but can't elect their oversight like we can with a public school. I see absolutely no benefit to having a bunch of disparate schools that have identical budgets and standards. We could do that with magnet schools. EDIT: I should also add, that I think people overestimate how much vouchers can do to solve the problem, which is largely socioeconomic. Rich people would still live close to the best schools and even if poor people could send their kids there, they still deal with so many disadvantages. If all the best schools are an hour bus ride away, that's unfair to people who don't live in that neighborhood. If I still cannot afford extra curriculars or class trips, then I still cannot give my kids the same education. There's so many other things that figure into the education formula that are not just the school you attend or the teacher that teaches you. I think the best option is to increase people's engagement in their school systems (via school board elections, lobbying, PTA and so on) and get incentives to improve public schools.